ColdFusion 8 feature survey

If you have not yet seen this, check it out. Not that this is an official Adobe survey, but if there's a huge developer call for some specific features, then it may have an effect. It has in the past: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?u=354942405396 Michael Dinowitz President: House of Fusion     http://www.houseoffusion.com Publisher: Fusion Authority     http://www.fusionauthority.com Adobe Community Expert

That a pretty good survey even though I don't know what some of the items are. I am sure over at Sean Corfield's blog there was a lot of other abilities mentioned (when will we finally get a cfimage tag?!) I wonder if the CF team will read those... And yes.. I am working on CFC refactoring and introspection, thank you very much. MD ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

On Jul 27, 2006, at 3:03 PM, Mark Drew wrote: > That a pretty good survey even though I don't know what some of the   > items are. FYI the "Mustang support" option I'm guessing is related to Java 1.6   subbed Mustang.  I *hope* this would also include full support for   Java 1.5? -- Damien McKenna - Web Developer - dmckenna@thelimucompany.com The Limu Company - http://www.thelimucompany.com/ - 407-804-1014 #include <stdjoke.h>

Michael Dinowitz wrote: > If you have not yet seen this, check it out. Not that this is an official Adobe survey, but if there's a huge developer call for some specific features, then it may have an effect. It has in the past: > http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?u=354942405396 I filled it out.  There are quite a few things on there that are already very easy to do with CF. Asking Adobe to build in image manipulation support is kind of silly since it's SO easy to do in a variety of ways, many of which are absolutely free and all of which are pretty easy to manage.  Problem is, of course, that you can't use them in shared environments where createObject() is disabled of course, but still.  Something like that would seem to be really low priority for Adobe. But many of the features on there are definately good ideas and couldn't easily be handled by third party solutions. I'll be curious to see the results, I hope they are published. rick

Hey Adobe, how about integrating updater one and updater 2? Thanks ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Isn't that what CF 7.0.2 does? > Hey Adobe, how about integrating updater one and updater 2? > > Thanks > -- =========================================================================== Raymond Camden, Vice President of Technology for roundpeg Email    : jedimaster@roundpeg.com Blog     : ray.camdenfamily.com AOL IM   : cfjedimaster "My ally is the Force, and a powerful ally it is." - Yoda

That's what I thought too... Raymond Camden wrote: > Isn't that what CF 7.0.2 does? > > >> Hey Adobe, how about integrating updater one and updater 2?

> If you have not yet seen this, check it out. Not that this is an > official Adobe survey, but if there's a huge developer call for some > specific features, then it may have an effect. It has in the past: > http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?u=354942405396 Hey Michael. That's a survey by me actually. :) I'll be posting the results on August 11th; it's an aggregation of things people have blogged about. It's high level, so when you see "BEtter XYZ..." - that means whatever you want it to mean. But it's more to capture people's perceptions, vs very low level specifics. Cheers! - Tariq (http://www.dopejam.com)

> > If you have not yet seen this, check it out. Not that this is an ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- This is perhaps a lame self-plug, but I spent a lot of time coming up with a comprehensive list of features with explanatory text for each that I'd like to see in Scorpio. Perhaps some of these items will help people make a better decision as to what they do and don't want in the next release: http://www.cbetta.com/blog/index.cfm/2006/7/31/a-new-week-a-new-coldfusion-8-wishlist Regards, Dave.

If it not official who's is it? "This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Oriel House, 26 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DL, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business, Registered in England, Number 678540.  It contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged.  It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com If you have not yet seen this, check it out. Not that this is an official Adobe survey, but if there's a huge developer call for some specific features, then it may have an effect. It has in the past: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?u=354942405396 Michael Dinowitz President: House of Fusion     http://www.houseoffusion.com Publisher: Fusion Authority     http://www.fusionauthority.com Adobe Community Expert

I thought ColdFusion introspects now? According to the CFC Explorer it does.. LOL "This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Oriel House, 26 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DL, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business, Registered in England, Number 678540.  It contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged.  It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com That a pretty good survey even though I don't know what some of the items are. I am sure over at Sean Corfield's blog there was a lot of other abilities mentioned (when will we finally get a cfimage tag?!) I wonder if the CF team will read those... And yes.. I am working on CFC refactoring and introspection, thank you very much. MD > If you have not yet seen this, check it out. Not that this is an official Adobe survey, but if there's a huge developer call for some specific features, then it may have an effect. It has in the past: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) wrote: > I thought ColdFusion introspects now? According to the CFC Explorer it > does.. The IDE doesn't.

Yes, the feature being asked for is automatic CFC introspection within CFEclipse. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

And yes, Mark Drew and company are working on this feature... Cutter __________ http://blog.cutterscrossing.com Brian Kotek wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

> And yes, Mark Drew and company are working on this feature... \o/ Introspection and refactoring support are about all I miss in CFEclipse and CFML over Idea and Java. -- Tom Chiverton **************************************************** This email is sent for and on behalf of Halliwells LLP. Halliwells LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales under registered number OC307980 whose registered office address is at St James's Court Brown Street Manchester M2 2JF.  A list of members is available for inspection at the registered office. Any reference to a partner in relation to Halliwells LLP means a member of Halliwells LLP. Regulated by the Law Society. CONFIDENTIALITY This email is intended only for the use of the addressee named above and may be confidential or legally privileged.  If you are not the addressee you must not read it and must not use any information contained in nor copy it nor inform any person other than Halliwells LLP or the addressee of its existence or contents.   If you have received this email in error please delete it and notify Halliwells LLP IT Department on 0870 365 8008. For more information about Halliwells LLP visit www.halliwells.com.

I think you were supposed to type that in the little text box at the bottom of the survey.  :> ~Brad Hey Adobe, how about integrating updater one and updater 2? Thanks

Already done, and on the download page for the updater. Just making sure it gets out there. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Yep Isn't that what CF 7.0.2 does? > Hey Adobe, how about integrating updater one and updater 2? > > Thanks > -- ======================================================================== === Raymond Camden, Vice President of Technology for roundpeg Email    : jedimaster@roundpeg.com Blog     : ray.camdenfamily.com AOL IM   : cfjedimaster "My ally is the Force, and a powerful ally it is." - Yoda

Nope. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

To be a little more... verbose. You have to install 7.0.1 before you install 7.0.2 or you get an annoying error about it not being able to find the CFIDE directory. Terrence Ryan Senior Systems Programmer Wharton Computing and Information Technology    E-mail:    tpryan@wharton.upenn.edu Nope. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Yep :P ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

You mean you have to install Updater 2 *AFTER* Updater 1. I thought you meant integrating updater 1 and 2 into the base CF install, which they have done.  When you do a clean install, it includes updaters 1 and 2. Rick

Here's what I'm saying. If you do a clean CF 7 install (my disk is just 7 no updates) you have to download and install both the updaters.  It would be a lot easier if I could download the one updater and install it and get the benefits of both. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

On Jul 27, 2006, at 4:41 PM, loathe wrote: > If you do a clean CF 7 install (my disk is just 7 no updates) you   > have to > download and install both the updaters.  It would be a lot easier   > if I could > download the one updater and install it and get the benefits of both. It *really* irks me when *any* software is like that.  When you do a   fresh download it should be bundled with all of the updates publicly   available to that point, there's no excuse other than corporate   laziness to do otherwise. A built-in updater in the admin interface would also be nice, you   load a page, it tells you what is available and offers to download &   install it for you. -- Damien McKenna - Web Developer - dmckenna@thelimucompany.com The Limu Company - http://www.thelimucompany.com/ - 407-804-1014 #include <stdjoke.h>

I'm saying if Fireworks and Windows can tell me when it's time to update, how hard could it be to work that into what is most likely an always on service on some server somewhere? Now, I should be able to disable auto updates easily, as I know I have a ton of servers that don't have web connections. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Problem is, of course, that you can't use them in shared environments where createObject() is disabled of course, but still.  Something like that would seem to be really low priority for Adobe. Maybe that should be the focus.  Someway that these types of features could be accessed with relative safety from shared environments. -------------- Ian Skinner Web Programmer BloodSource www.BloodSource.org Sacramento, CA --------- | 1 |   | ---------  Binary Soduko |   |   | --------- "C code. C code run. Run code run. Please!" - Cynthia Dunning Confidentiality Notice:  This message including any attachments is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete any copies of this message.

Or enhance the sandbox security to let the CFAdministrator allow only certain classes, by the full class names you'd use in the createObject call (e.g., allow "com.companyname.class1", "org.apache.xerces", etc). > Problem is, of course, that you can't use them in shared environments where > createObject() is disabled of course, but still.  Something like that would seem to be really low priority for Adobe. > > > Maybe that should be the focus.  Someway that these types of features could be accessed with relative safety from shared environments.

> It *really* irks me when *any* software is like that.  When > you do a fresh download it should be bundled with all of the > updates publicly available to that point, there's no excuse > other than corporate laziness to do otherwise. s/corporate laziness/limited QA resources I would much rather have a patch and update process that I know will work for certain, than a new installer that I don't know will work. I've run into this problem often enough. Every time they build a new installer, it has to be thoroughly tested. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber vendor-authorized instruction at our training centers in Washington DC, Atlanta, Chicago, Baltimore, Northern Virginia, or on-site at your location. Visit http://training.figleaf.com/ for more information!

That's true.  With most of my government clients we have to wait for about a year before we can use updaters generally.  That's about how long it takes it to make it through the change control board and the security people. It's a big PITA ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

I would like to see some better email debugging.   At the moment there's none.  You fill out a form, click submit, then wait .. and wait .. and wait .. and eventually conclude that your email isnt going to arrive. Then with nothing to go on except the assumption that your email didnt work, you try to debug what might be the problem.   THen try again .. and wait . and wait . and wait . and wait. In  a shared environment you dont even get to see the failed emails cos they are in a system level folder.  Try to ask the  sysadmin to pick out yours and they are confronted with a undelivr folder with who knows how many emails in there and they are asked to scan through them all for you.   If they feel like it. I reckon it should be possible for the CFMAIL tag to produce far better error reporting than just  ** *NOTHING ** And Peter TIlbrook came up with a great idea today - why cant the Undelivr folder be in the shared web space somewhere  - each site owner can have their own maybe a "failto="" kind of parameter in the CFMAIL tag. so the failed emails will be where we can all get at them and have a look at what the problem is. It's got to be better than "send an email and see if it works, if it doesnt  try something else  and see if that works " Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com ColdFusion, PHP, ASP, ASP.NET hosting from AUD$15/month

Can't this particular issue be resolved if you use the existing "failto" attribute of CFMAIL? As this would route failed mail to a specific email address instead of the Undelivr folder. Granted it's sub optimal, in that you have to look someplace else for the messages. Terrence Ryan Senior Systems Programmer Wharton Computing and Information Technology    E-mail:    tpryan@wharton.upenn.edu I would like to see some better email debugging.   At the moment there's none.  You fill out a form, click submit, then wait .. and wait .. and wait .. and eventually conclude that your email isnt going to arrive. Then with nothing to go on except the assumption that your email didnt work, you try to debug what might be the problem.   THen try again .. and wait . and wait . and wait . and wait. In  a shared environment you dont even get to see the failed emails cos they are in a system level folder.  Try to ask the  sysadmin to pick out yours and they are confronted with a undelivr folder with who knows how many emails in there and they are asked to scan through them all for you.   If they feel like it. I reckon it should be possible for the CFMAIL tag to produce far better error reporting than just  ** *NOTHING ** And Peter TIlbrook came up with a great idea today - why cant the Undelivr folder be in the shared web space somewhere  - each site owner can have their own maybe a "failto="" kind of parameter in the CFMAIL tag. so the failed emails will be where we can all get at them and have a look at what the problem is. It's got to be better than "send an email and see if it works, if it doesnt  try something else  and see if that works " Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com ColdFusion, PHP, ASP, ASP.NET hosting from AUD$15/month

Ryan, Terrence wrote: > Can't this particular issue be resolved if you use the existing "failto" > attribute of CFMAIL? > No, failto only works if the email is accepted by the local SMTP server.   If the mail doesn't get accepted by the SMTP server, it just goes into coldfusion's undelivr folder. Rick

No. the issue with CFMAIL is that if you have a syntax error in just about any other place in ColdFusion, it throws an error and you can deal with it.   IF you have a syntax error in the content of a CFMAIL message, nothing happens.    Since you dont usually get to see your email going anyway, the only way you know there was a problem with your CFMAIL is that after 20 minutes or half an hour you haven't got your test message yet. IF you have an error in the attributes of the cfmail tag, or if you have a server name missing for example or a setting wrong,  incorrect password, or a syntax error in the body of the mail message, the result is the same - nothing. But a valid email can take up to 20 minutes to be sent, go through the mail system and find its way into your MS Outlook, so you dont really know that your mail has failed until a reasonable period has elapsed and you can be sure that had an email been sent you would have received it by now. IN a shared environment you normally have no access to the Undelivr folder so you can't see if your mail failed and is sitting there. There can be any of a dozen reasons why your mail has failed, not all of which are in your code.   And there is no way to debug it.  You just have to keep trying things  until you get it working. And as I have said, some of the reasons why it doesnt work might be related to something completely out of your control.  Or it might indeed BE working but just taking its time to get to you.   For example it can take 8 hours sometimes for my posts to CFTALK to appear in my gmail box.   So every time i post my trial email from a form, do i have to wait 8 hours before I conclude that it's not going to work? Thats why I think ColdFusion ought to offer a better degree of debugging.     Not everyone works in a controlled local environment all the time.    This week i've had a terrible time trying to figure out why three of my clients would have customer order forms that dont send emails to them as required.   Was there a code problem suddenly introduced?   Was a system setting different ?   was there a problem with the mail server?    It took ages.  And even then when the emails suddenly started working again - why?  was it something i fixed?  or was the whole problem something beyond our system that went away? It's all far to hit and miss for my liking.  I think the CFMAIL part of coldfusion is the worst part of the whole language/server/application. Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com ColdFusion, PHP, ASP, ASP.NET hosting from AUD$15/month ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Mike Kear wrote: > > In  a shared environment you dont even get to see the failed emails > cos they are in a system level folder.  Try to ask the  sysadmin to > pick out yours and they are confronted with a undelivr folder with who > knows how many emails in there and they are asked to scan through them > all for you.   If they feel like it. Any decent host has a scheduled task to move the message in the undelivered folder to some place accessible by the customer. > I reckon it should be possible for the CFMAIL tag to produce far > better error reporting than just  ** *NOTHING ** Sure it is. Just disable spooling and you will get the error right in the page. Jochem

> If you do a clean CF 7 install (my disk is just 7 no updates) > you have to download and install both the updaters.  It would > be a lot easier if I could download the one updater and > install it and get the benefits of both. They do provide a 7.0.2 installer, for people who haven't installed 7 at all yet. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber vendor-authorized instruction at our training centers in Washington DC, Atlanta, Chicago, Baltimore, Northern Virginia, or on-site at your location. Visit http://training.figleaf.com/ for more information!

I can't use it with most of my clients, just the "approved" disk. Also, who wants to DL 300+ megs of crap when you only need 100+ megs of crap? ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

> Also, who wants to DL 300+ megs of crap when you only need 100+ megs of > crap? Dung beetles? Bryan Stevenson B.Comm. VP & Director of E-Commerce Development Electric Edge Systems Group Inc. phone: 250.480.0642 fax: 250.480.1264 cell: 250.920.8830 e-mail: bryan@electricedgesystems.com web: www.electricedgesystems.com

So, if I upgrade a server from CFMX 6.1 I will be safe applying only 7.02 ? Thanks Victor ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

+1 Something like Windows Update or the Adobe Software Updaters would be awesome. M!ke On Jul 27, 2006, at 4:41 PM, loathe wrote: > If you do a clean CF 7 install (my disk is just 7 no updates) you have > to download and install both the updaters.  It would be a lot easier > if I could download the one updater and install it and get the > benefits of both. It *really* irks me when *any* software is like that.  When you do a fresh download it should be bundled with all of the updates publicly available to that point, there's no excuse other than corporate laziness to do otherwise. A built-in updater in the admin interface would also be nice, you load a page, it tells you what is available and offers to download & install it for you.

Ugh.  I _HATE_ Adobe's software updaters. I'm learning PHP in preparation for the day that Adobe drives me over the edge.  Ah, how I yearn for the Allaire days... ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Yeah, peeps forget that Adobe/MM are not Microsoft and their resources are a piss in the ocean compared to larger software/corporate houses.... "This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Oriel House, 26 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DL, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business, Registered in England, Number 678540.  It contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged.  It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com > It *really* irks me when *any* software is like that.  When > you do a fresh download it should be bundled with all of the > updates publicly available to that point, there's no excuse > other than corporate laziness to do otherwise. s/corporate laziness/limited QA resources I would much rather have a patch and update process that I know will work for certain, than a new installer that I don't know will work. I've run into this problem often enough. Every time they build a new installer, it has to be thoroughly tested. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber vendor-authorized instruction at our training centers in Washington DC, Atlanta, Chicago, Baltimore, Northern Virginia, or on-site at your location. Visit http://training.figleaf.com/ for more information!

> Yeah, peeps forget that Adobe/MM are not Microsoft and their > resources are a > piss in the ocean compared to larger software/corporate houses.... I read recently that Adobe is now the world's 3rd largest software company, after buying Macromedia.  So they have a lot more resources than you might think.  But I'd agree, they probably still pale in comparison to Microsoft's yearly revenue... ------------ This transmission may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein (including any reliance thereon) is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you received this transmission in error, please immediately contact the sender and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format. Thank you. A1.

> So, if I upgrade a server from CFMX 6.1 I will be safe > applying only 7.02 ? If you have the full 7.0.2 installer, as opposed to the updater, I guess so. Honestly, I really don't know for sure, since almost all the installations I work with use the multi-server version, which isn't upgradeable - you have to uninstall and reinstall, or install into a new server instance, etc. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber vendor-authorized instruction at our training centers in Washington DC, Atlanta, Chicago, Baltimore, Northern Virginia, or on-site at your location. Visit http://training.figleaf.com/ for more information!

Thanks Dave, I think I will take the safe path and install, 7 then 7.01 and then 7.02 /r Victor ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

This is detailed in the 7.0.2 FAQ, but since many folks don't read docs anymore.... :) That's correct: download or buy CF7 (online or CD/box) and you'll now get the 7.0.2 full installer.  CF 7.0.0 is no longer available for sale or download (except perhaps in older box copies in stock in retail channels). 1) Folks running 7.0.1 download the 7.0.2 Updater Kit. 2) Folks doing new installs of CF7 should get the Full Kit (they're 7.0.2). Folks who are still running CF 7.0.0 either first update to 7.0.1, then 7.0.2 OR (in the case of non-JRun J2EE installs, for example), follow the instrutions in the 7.0.2 Install Instructions to backup settings, undeploy, install/deploy 7.0.2 Full Kits and restire settings. Folks, we include security fixes in these releases that are needed to protect you and help keep your sites safe from actack. Please let anyone you know running old versions of CF to visit the CF update page and get current as a matter of best practice. Damon ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Hi Damon, Actually my question was upgrading from CFMX 6.1 to 7.02. Can I just download CFMX 7.02 from the Adobe, upgrade my CFMX 6.1 server and then buy an upgrade license on line and apply it? Thanks On 7/30/06, dcooper @ macromedia. com dcooper @ macromedia. com < dcooper@macromedia.com> wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

> Hi Damon, > > Actually my question was upgrading from CFMX 6.1 to 7.02. > Can I just download CFMX 7.02 from the Adobe, upgrade my CFMX 6.1 server > and > then buy an upgrade license on line and apply it? I'm pretty sure that's how it works.  Haven't done it that way myself, but sounds correct! :D -ps just be sure you download the trail and not the developer edition, in case that makes a difference.

Yes, that's correct.   Damon ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

> I can't use it with most of my clients, just the "approved" disk. But you can install the updater? That just doesn't make sense to me, but then again I'm not a government security guy. Couldn't you just call it an updater, and install it anyway in that case? > Also, who wants to DL 300+ megs of crap when you only need > 100+ megs of crap? Well, if you no longer need the original install CD, you have a net loss of crap - the 7.0.2 installer is ~280MB or so, I think, while the original installer plus the updater are somewhat larger. If you end up storing all your installers as ISOs or raw files on disk, as I do, you end up with less crap. But yeah, I see what you're saying. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber vendor-authorized instruction at our training centers in Washington DC, Atlanta, Chicago, Baltimore, Northern Virginia, or on-site at your location. Visit http://training.figleaf.com/ for more information!

That would be the best you could hope for - the ability to read into your own email space. I am suprised that this isn't possible. You won't be able to get much more info that what is recorded in the txt file itself as ColdFusion seems to work on the principle of, f it was able to be written to the disk that was a success! Is there no way you can create your own filename/header then surely that way, if allowed you could just read into the spool/undlvb folder for it. A mail process does write the error into the email file itself - so you can get the error should you need to. "This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Oriel House, 26 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DL, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business, Registered in England, Number 678540.  It contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged.  It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com I would like to see some better email debugging.   At the moment there's none.  You fill out a form, click submit, then wait .. and wait .. and wait .. and eventually conclude that your email isnt going to arrive. Then with nothing to go on except the assumption that your email didnt work, you try to debug what might be the problem.   THen try again .. and wait . and wait . and wait . and wait. In  a shared environment you dont even get to see the failed emails cos they are in a system level folder.  Try to ask the  sysadmin to pick out yours and they are confronted with a undelivr folder with who knows how many emails in there and they are asked to scan through them all for you.   If they feel like it. I reckon it should be possible for the CFMAIL tag to produce far better error reporting than just  ** *NOTHING ** And Peter TIlbrook came up with a great idea today - why cant the Undelivr folder be in the shared web space somewhere  - each site owner can have their own maybe a "failto="" kind of parameter in the CFMAIL tag. so the failed emails will be where we can all get at them and have a look at what the problem is. It's got to be better than "send an email and see if it works, if it doesnt  try something else  and see if that works " Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com ColdFusion, PHP, ASP, ASP.NET hosting from AUD$15/month

Isn't that extrospection though? "This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Oriel House, 26 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DL, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business, Registered in England, Number 678540.  It contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged.  It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com Yes, the feature being asked for is automatic CFC introspection within CFEclipse. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

The ability to store CFMAIL messages in the application that actually generated them. A boon when on a shared server they keep changing email settings for.

Which IDE? DW? That does. Also one thing I would like changed is that cfcatch is a really a struct :-) "This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Oriel House, 26 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DL, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business, Registered in England, Number 678540.  It contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged.  It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) wrote: > I thought ColdFusion introspects now? According to the CFC Explorer it > does.. The IDE doesn't.

Well I suppose there are ways around it by using the server="" attribute to relay via other servers. "This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Oriel House, 26 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DL, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business, Registered in England, Number 678540.  It contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged.  It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com The ability to store CFMAIL messages in the application that actually generated them. A boon when on a shared server they keep changing email settings for.

Really? Largest as in employees or in revenue? I think with Microsoft is that they literally throw money at resources - they know what they are doing.  It may be the 3rd largest in it's sector I suppose. "This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Oriel House, 26 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DL, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business, Registered in England, Number 678540.  It contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged.  It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com > Yeah, peeps forget that Adobe/MM are not Microsoft and their > resources are a > piss in the ocean compared to larger software/corporate houses.... I read recently that Adobe is now the world's 3rd largest software company, after buying Macromedia.  So they have a lot more resources than you might think.  But I'd agree, they probably still pale in comparison to Microsoft's yearly revenue... ------------ This transmission may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein (including any reliance thereon) is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you received this transmission in error, please immediately contact the sender and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format. Thank you. A1.

> Really? Largest as in employees or in revenue? I think with > Microsoft is > that they literally throw money at resources - they know what they are > doing.  It may be the 3rd largest in it's sector I suppose. Well, I tried to find where I read that, but couldn't find it.  Anyway, usually when I read articles that discuss company sizes, the are talking about revenue.  I did find a lot of articles that said that Adobe is the 3rd largest software company in the US, in revenue, but all of these articles were quoting a 2000 Adobe press release. -------------- This transmission may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein (including any reliance thereon) is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you received this transmission in error, please immediately contact the sender and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format. Thank you. A1.

Hmmm so, <CFMAIL></CFMAIL> doesn't fail? (no To etc).  I can understand it not erroring if you have a bad username/passord or server name/IP as ColdFusion is not technically in the loop at that part of the process. ColdFusion literally just writes the email out (assuming you have correct tag syntax) and it is the SMTP server which will say yay or nay to JavaMail inside ColdFusion. It is not in control and should never be in control of this process. "This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Oriel House, 26 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DL, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business, Registered in England, Number 678540.  It contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged.  It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com No. the issue with CFMAIL is that if you have a syntax error in just about any other place in ColdFusion, it throws an error and you can deal with it.   IF you have a syntax error in the content of a CFMAIL message, nothing happens.    Since you dont usually get to see your email going anyway, the only way you know there was a problem with your CFMAIL is that after 20 minutes or half an hour you haven't got your test message yet. IF you have an error in the attributes of the cfmail tag, or if you have a server name missing for example or a setting wrong,  incorrect password, or a syntax error in the body of the mail message, the result is the same - nothing. But a valid email can take up to 20 minutes to be sent, go through the mail system and find its way into your MS Outlook, so you dont really know that your mail has failed until a reasonable period has elapsed and you can be sure that had an email been sent you would have received it by now. IN a shared environment you normally have no access to the Undelivr folder so you can't see if your mail failed and is sitting there. There can be any of a dozen reasons why your mail has failed, not all of which are in your code.   And there is no way to debug it.  You just have to keep trying things  until you get it working. And as I have said, some of the reasons why it doesnt work might be related to something completely out of your control.  Or it might indeed BE working but just taking its time to get to you.   For example it can take 8 hours sometimes for my posts to CFTALK to appear in my gmail box.   So every time i post my trial email from a form, do i have to wait 8 hours before I conclude that it's not going to work? Thats why I think ColdFusion ought to offer a better degree of debugging.     Not everyone works in a controlled local environment all the time.    This week i've had a terrible time trying to figure out why three of my clients would have customer order forms that dont send emails to them as required.   Was there a code problem suddenly introduced?   Was a system setting different ?   was there a problem with the mail server?    It took ages.  And even then when the emails suddenly started working again - why?  was it something i fixed?  or was the whole problem something beyond our system that went away? It's all far to hit and miss for my liking.  I think the CFMAIL part of coldfusion is the worst part of the whole language/server/application. Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com ColdFusion, PHP, ASP, ASP.NET hosting from AUD$15/month ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

So my point remains ....  I dont care which part of the system tells me what's wrong as long as SOMETHING does. At the moment, the only indication you have that there's something wrong with your mail is the fact that it hasnt arrived.   Or is is that your email has actually worked ok but just not arrived yet? One thing that could happens is Peter TIlbrook's idea - have the Undelivr folder (or it's equivaient) configurable in the code, perhaps in the CFMAIL tag - maybe a underliverto="" attribute.   Then at least there would be one thing you could look at to see why the email didnt work.   It doesnt cover all cases by any means but it does cover some, and thats a step in the right direction. I didnt mention your silly <cfmail></cfmail> example, because these days with tag completion and code hinting I have very few of that kind of syntax error.   I'd never try to put that in a page because my IDE wouldnt let me without warning. Neil, you dont seem to think there is a need fo have any debugging of CFMAIL.   I'm not sure why.  Perhaps you never make errors.  Perhaps you never use CFMAIL in a shared hosting environment where you have no access to any system level folders.  Perhaps you love spending 5 times longer  building a simple cfmail app than any other part of your system.  I dont know . but i think there are lots of people who find CFMAIL a devil of a functionality to build unless it's very stock-standard and basic. Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com ColdFusion, PHP, ASP, ASP.NET hosting from AUD$15/month ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Not at all, I think debugging is only a good thing but you have to see that CFMAL does exactly what it should do at present - and it DOES tell you if an email fails (both in logs and in the mail message itself moved to the undeliv folder), but maybe not just in shared environment? I could see that in a shared environment that you may be able to tell if an email has failed though on an owned environment you can simply look into the maillogs / undeliverable folder to see why an email failed.  I am not familiar with how shared environments work so maybe there is a way it can be done? Snake etc are v.familiar with this so maybe he can input. Surely Adobe know this and have workarounds? Maybe you can look into using the JavaMail API to see why an email failed - have a look to see what it available to you (assuming you have createObject capability in that hosting) "This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Oriel House, 26 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DL, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business, Registered in England, Number 678540.  It contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged.  It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com So my point remains ....  I dont care which part of the system tells me what's wrong as long as SOMETHING does. At the moment, the only indication you have that there's something wrong with your mail is the fact that it hasnt arrived.   Or is is that your email has actually worked ok but just not arrived yet? One thing that could happens is Peter TIlbrook's idea - have the Undelivr folder (or it's equivaient) configurable in the code, perhaps in the CFMAIL tag - maybe a underliverto="" attribute.   Then at least there would be one thing you could look at to see why the email didnt work.   It doesnt cover all cases by any means but it does cover some, and thats a step in the right direction. I didnt mention your silly <cfmail></cfmail> example, because these days with tag completion and code hinting I have very few of that kind of syntax error.   I'd never try to put that in a page because my IDE wouldnt let me without warning. Neil, you dont seem to think there is a need fo have any debugging of CFMAIL.   I'm not sure why.  Perhaps you never make errors.  Perhaps you never use CFMAIL in a shared hosting environment where you have no access to any system level folders.  Perhaps you love spending 5 times longer  building a simple cfmail app than any other part of your system.  I dont know . but i think there are lots of people who find CFMAIL a devil of a functionality to build unless it's very stock-standard and basic. Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com ColdFusion, PHP, ASP, ASP.NET hosting from AUD$15/month ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- JavaMail > inside ColdFusion. It is not in control and should never be in control of > this process. > > >

Thanks Jochen; I am not familiar with shared hosting and to be honest I forgot about spooling! There are also loads of other ways to tell from logs etc. "This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Oriel House, 26 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DL, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business, Registered in England, Number 678540.  It contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged.  It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com Mike Kear wrote: > > In  a shared environment you dont even get to see the failed emails > cos they are in a system level folder.  Try to ask the  sysadmin to > pick out yours and they are confronted with a undelivr folder with who > knows how many emails in there and they are asked to scan through them > all for you.   If they feel like it. Any decent host has a scheduled task to move the message in the undelivered folder to some place accessible by the customer. > I reckon it should be possible for the CFMAIL tag to produce far > better error reporting than just  ** *NOTHING ** Sure it is. Just disable spooling and you will get the error right in the page. Jochem

Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) wrote: > Thanks Jochen; I am not familiar with shared hosting and to be honest I > forgot about spooling! The only involvement I have with shared hosting is that I run one :) Anything in the undeliverable folder gets parsed and if the programmer has bothered to code a failto attribute in the cfmail it has a failto address in the header and I send it there. If the programmer didn't bother about a failto attribute I suppose he doesn't want the errors and I just delete the failed email. The problem with that is exactly the opposite problem from the one Mike has: some errors get handled twice, once in the try/catch that gets triggered when you don't spool and once when they are in the undeliverable folder. Some people find it very confusing they are notified twice of the same error :) Jochem

OK then .  I give up.  There is nothing about any aspect of ColdFusion that could possibly be improved. Waste of time suggesting anything.  The fact that I spend a significant amount of my time helping my clients work through CFMAIL problems is probably only fantasy on my part. What a bunch of negative thinkers you lot are. I'm bloody glad you arent working on the feature list for the next version. There would be no new features at all. Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com ColdFusion, PHP, ASP, ASP.NET hosting from AUD$15/month ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Mike Kear wrote: > OK then .  I give up.  There is nothing about any aspect of ColdFusion > that could possibly be improved. > > Waste of time suggesting anything.  The fact that I spend a > significant amount of my time helping my clients work through CFMAIL > problems is probably only fantasy on my part. I don't know about your customers, but the ones I host get an explanation about how to use failto and spoolenable in their welcome message and that is enough. And for the record: I already filed an enhancement request for the failto attribute to do pretty much what Peter Tillbrook suggested during the 6.1 beta cycle (#50755, April 12, 2003). > What a bunch of negative thinkers you lot are. I'm bloody glad you > arent working on the feature list for the next version. There would be > no new features at all. There would be the features I needed for problems that I have not solved yet instead of the features for things I can work around. Jochem

That is not what we are saying! The fact here is that you say there is no way to tell if an email fails - and we know there is - both at server level and code. What more do you need to tell that an email fails? it is all their for you. ColdFusion is 10 years old and this is probably that most basic of tags. Jochen provided a good way hosts deal with the undeliverable. "This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Oriel House, 26 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DL, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business, Registered in England, Number 678540.  It contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged.  It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com OK then .  I give up.  There is nothing about any aspect of ColdFusion that could possibly be improved. Waste of time suggesting anything.  The fact that I spend a significant amount of my time helping my clients work through CFMAIL problems is probably only fantasy on my part. What a bunch of negative thinkers you lot are. I'm bloody glad you arent working on the feature list for the next version. There would be no new features at all. Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com ColdFusion, PHP, ASP, ASP.NET hosting from AUD$15/month > Robertson-Ravo, Neil (RX) wrote: > > Thanks Jochen; I am not familiar with shared hosting and to be honest I > > forgot about spooling! > > The only involvement I have with shared hosting is that I run one :) Anything in the undeliverable folder gets parsed and if the programmer has bothered to code a failto attribute in the cfmail it has a failto address in the header and I send it there. If the programmer didn't bother about a failto attribute I suppose he doesn't want the errors and I just delete the failed email. > > > The problem with that is exactly the opposite problem from the one Mike has: some errors get handled twice, once in the try/catch that gets triggered when you don't spool and once when they are in the undeliverable folder. Some people find it very confusing they are notified twice of the same error :) > > Jochem > >

Yep.  SIlly me.   I've been coding ColdFusion for only 9 years. I have more than 40 clients building web sites on my system. I build sites for other clients on their systems too.  In all, over the last 9 years I've worked on self-hosted systems and shared hosting systems. In fact I think i've worked on sites on about 6 different hosting centres. Some mine, some were other hosting companies my clients have chosen.  My first learning experience all those years ago was with Shanje (SHUDDER!), and lately with HostMySite, and Netspeed and others in between. NOT ONE . .NONE have ever had any plan to allow users to get access to undelivered emails. As i said, i had this fantasy that last week alone I spent 6 hours trying to track down CFMAIL problems that my clients were having in their code.  Obviously i was mistaken and was reading the paper all that time instead.   The panic emails from my clients asking for help figuring out why their forms weren't working were figments of my imagination. CFMAIL is a tag that gives a lot of heartburn to some users.    It was impertinent of me to suggest that perhaps we might make CFMAIL easier for users to code.   After all, ColdFusion had that reputation years ago that it was easy to use for neophytes,  but "REAL" SERVER PROGRAMS shed that notion really early on.   And if Coldfusion is to be a "REAL" SERVER app like .ASP or .PHP it has to be more difficult to use not easier. I dont know what i was thinking.  Easier to use.  Reduce the time taken to develop and debug.   Jeez.  That would only get in the way of the headlong rush to force ColdFusion into being a second-class imitation of something else rather than the best in the world at what it does best - something that the java and dotnet and php programmers would envy and whine about to their vendors.  NO! We wouldnt want that.  We have to continually compare CFMX to other solutions, instead of having THEM follow US. For many shared hosted users it isnt all there.  (not their - your spellcheck has led you astray).   You dont have experience of shared hosting Neil so I think you should pull your head in on the subject. There are quite a few aspects of CF sites that are different for shared hosted environments.   And access to server-level folders and the CF Admin  is one of them. It's not essential that CFMAIL be made easier to use and debug. But it would be of assistance to users in shared hosting environments.   We were talking about things we'd like to see in CF8.   I saw a need and said so but now i wish I hadn't.   I think CF would be a little easier and faster to develop with if debugging of that tag was improved. And found a simple thing that could be done to make it easier to debug.  Since then you've done nothing but cry it down.    I dont know why you see it as such a threat.  You wouldnt have to use it.  You could still do any debugging the old way. Apparently you think anything that makes CFMX easier to use and debug is a bad thing.  I can only imagine you think it makes it less like java or something if it's easier to use. I sure wont make the mistake again  of thinking it would be a good thing if CFMX were any easier to use even in a small way. Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com ColdFusion, PHP, ASP, ASP.NET hosting from AUD$15/month ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

From somewhat of an outsider's perspective on this "discussion"... Usually the problems for which workarounds have to be developed become features eventually. Yes, it's true there are workarounds for the email issue, but if it's a significant issue, as Mike is saying, then CF should be enhanced to handle it on its own and not with workarounds. Just some thoughts... Rick Yep.  SIlly me.   I've been coding ColdFusion for only 9 years. I have more than 40 clients building web sites on my system. I build sites for other clients on their systems too.  In all, over the last 9 years I've worked on self-hosted systems and shared hosting systems. In fact I think i've worked on sites on about 6 different hosting centres. Some mine, some were other hosting companies my clients have chosen.  My first learning experience all those years ago was with Shanje (SHUDDER!), and lately with HostMySite, and Netspeed and others in between. NOT ONE . .NONE have ever had any plan to allow users to get access to undelivered emails. As i said, i had this fantasy that last week alone I spent 6 hours trying to track down CFMAIL problems that my clients were having in their code. Obviously i was mistaken and was reading the paper all that time instead.   The panic emails from my clients asking for help figuring out why their forms weren't working were figments of my imagination. CFMAIL is a tag that gives a lot of heartburn to some users.    It was impertinent of me to suggest that perhaps we might make CFMAIL easier for users to code.   After all, ColdFusion had that reputation years ago that it was easy to use for neophytes,  but "REAL" SERVER PROGRAMS shed that notion really early on.   And if Coldfusion is to be a "REAL" SERVER app like .ASP or .PHP it has to be more difficult to use not easier. I dont know what i was thinking.  Easier to use.  Reduce the time taken to develop and debug.   Jeez.  That would only get in the way of the headlong rush to force ColdFusion into being a second-class imitation of something else rather than the best in the world at what it does best - something that the java and dotnet and php programmers would envy and whine about to their vendors.  NO! We wouldnt want that.  We have to continually compare CFMX to other solutions, instead of having THEM follow US. For many shared hosted users it isnt all there.  (not their - your spellcheck has led you astray).   You dont have experience of shared hosting Neil so I think you should pull your head in on the subject. There are quite a few aspects of CF sites that are different for shared hosted environments.   And access to server-level folders and the CF Admin  is one of them. It's not essential that CFMAIL be made easier to use and debug. But it would be of assistance to users in shared hosting environments.   We were talking about things we'd like to see in CF8.   I saw a need and said so but now i wish I hadn't.   I think CF would be a little easier and faster to develop with if debugging of that tag was improved. And found a simple thing that could be done to make it easier to debug.  Since then you've done nothing but cry it down.    I dont know why you see it as such a threat.  You wouldnt have to use it.  You could still do any debugging the old way. Apparently you think anything that makes CFMX easier to use and debug is a bad thing.  I can only imagine you think it makes it less like java or something if it's easier to use. I sure wont make the mistake again  of thinking it would be a good thing if CFMX were any easier to use even in a small way. Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com ColdFusion, PHP, ASP, ASP.NET hosting from AUD$15/month > That is not what we are saying! The fact here is that you say there is > no way to tell if an email fails - and we know there is - both at > server level and code. > > What more do you need to tell that an email fails? it is all their for you. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Ditto, Rick!  And workarounds are usually the easiest features to implement! You KNOW what you want, or expect, or whatnot. No need for votes, etc. CFMAIL has had "issues" for ages, it constantly killed my server, with CF 5 I think.  It's gotten better, but I can feel Mike's frustration, there is a certain air of the "fax modem" that's a modem but not really a fax, if you catch my drift. I think I saw a rating scale on how well various systems handled email, and CF was at the bottom. But that's just basically hear-say. I remember having to be up at 3am, just to restart CF and clean the spool folder. Heh. 'magine? "Having" to do anything... *sigh* (sorry, side thought about my lack of focus). But seriously, I've seen cfmail pop up as a complaint enough that I wouldn't try to sell it as not needing improvement.  I wouldn't mind being able to use some of the functionality that's already in javamail, for instance (secure imap! ;o).  I mean, *I* can, as I can gleam what I need to use the java, but no neophyte could do that very easy. It's a tough call, this feature request stuff.  Sorta like voting, is the real populace getting heard?  If a tree falls in the forest, and no one is around, does it matter?  Personally, I don't use the mail part of CF much, so I could care less, and would rather see some thing I *DO* use or want to use get the attention, but I won't try to downplay someone else's request to get mine in there.  Not that that's what happened, but you know, subconsciously, we want what we want or whatever. Plus, what is wanted is cake to do, we're not talking complicated math here.  Adobe could hire some goons for cfmail and still see a ton of improvement/nifty options. Personally, I would have filed Mike's request under "known issues"*, if anything.  But again, maybe just cuz I've run into trouble with it as well.  And don't buy the "once it's ""sent"", it's out of CF's hands" theory. Sheesh. Our UI's are finally coming back, but email is stuck in the last century? *known as in: Adobe could get a raft of "wishes" just via the livedocs. Heh.  Man, the moon must be at a certain distance from the earth or something, right?  I wish I could think of something funny to lighten the mood... oh, I know; What did the three legged dog say when he walked into the saloon?  WAIT FOR IT... WAIT FOR IT... I'm looking for the man who shot my paw. Har! Har! Har! Awesome, no? :]enny ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- Actually CF turned 11 this month.

Jeez no, I want real-time debugging back pronto! All for it. You will remember what it was like for "Cold Fusion". I don't see it as a threat what you are asking far from it they just haven't seen it as a necessary edition. If you get it in their then cool, as Ray would say go/wish! Maybe if they get away from adding Flex this, Flex that you might be lucky... Maybe Jochem has the best host ever :-) the point about it being 10 years old as that the problem exists and someone somewhere must have came up with a solution - my only backbi You must have got a body too long on that mail! Maybe the solution is to get your own SMTP server and send all you mail to that - job done email debug at your fingertips :-p "This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Oriel House, 26 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DL, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business, Registered in England, Number 678540.  It contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged.  It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com Yep.  SIlly me.   I've been coding ColdFusion for only 9 years. I have more than 40 clients building web sites on my system. I build sites for other clients on their systems too.  In all, over the last 9 years I've worked on self-hosted systems and shared hosting systems. In fact I think i've worked on sites on about 6 different hosting centres. Some mine, some were other hosting companies my clients have chosen.  My first learning experience all those years ago was with Shanje (SHUDDER!), and lately with HostMySite, and Netspeed and others in between. NOT ONE . .NONE have ever had any plan to allow users to get access to undelivered emails. As i said, i had this fantasy that last week alone I spent 6 hours trying to track down CFMAIL problems that my clients were having in their code.  Obviously i was mistaken and was reading the paper all that time instead.   The panic emails from my clients asking for help figuring out why their forms weren't working were figments of my imagination. CFMAIL is a tag that gives a lot of heartburn to some users.    It was impertinent of me to suggest that perhaps we might make CFMAIL easier for users to code.   After all, ColdFusion had that reputation years ago that it was easy to use for neophytes,  but "REAL" SERVER PROGRAMS shed that notion really early on.   And if Coldfusion is to be a "REAL" SERVER app like .ASP or .PHP it has to be more difficult to use not easier. I dont know what i was thinking.  Easier to use.  Reduce the time taken to develop and debug.   Jeez.  That would only get in the way of the headlong rush to force ColdFusion into being a second-class imitation of something else rather than the best in the world at what it does best - something that the java and dotnet and php programmers would envy and whine about to their vendors.  NO! We wouldnt want that.  We have to continually compare CFMX to other solutions, instead of having THEM follow US. For many shared hosted users it isnt all there.  (not their - your spellcheck has led you astray).   You dont have experience of shared hosting Neil so I think you should pull your head in on the subject. There are quite a few aspects of CF sites that are different for shared hosted environments.   And access to server-level folders and the CF Admin  is one of them. It's not essential that CFMAIL be made easier to use and debug. But it would be of assistance to users in shared hosting environments.   We were talking about things we'd like to see in CF8.   I saw a need and said so but now i wish I hadn't.   I think CF would be a little easier and faster to develop with if debugging of that tag was improved. And found a simple thing that could be done to make it easier to debug.  Since then you've done nothing but cry it down.    I dont know why you see it as such a threat.  You wouldnt have to use it.  You could still do any debugging the old way. Apparently you think anything that makes CFMX easier to use and debug is a bad thing.  I can only imagine you think it makes it less like java or something if it's easier to use. I sure wont make the mistake again  of thinking it would be a good thing if CFMX were any easier to use even in a small way. Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com ColdFusion, PHP, ASP, ASP.NET hosting from AUD$15/month > That is not what we are saying! The fact here is that you say there is no > way to tell if an email fails - and we know there is - both at server level > and code. > > What more do you need to tell that an email fails? it is all their for you. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Indeed, and it makes you wonder why that, such a significant problem has not been addressed in earlier editions. Must be a reason?    "This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Oriel House, 26 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DL, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business, Registered in England, Number 678540.  It contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged.  It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com From somewhat of an outsider's perspective on this "discussion"... Usually the problems for which workarounds have to be developed become features eventually. Yes, it's true there are workarounds for the email issue, but if it's a significant issue, as Mike is saying, then CF should be enhanced to handle it on its own and not with workarounds. Just some thoughts... Rick Yep.  SIlly me.   I've been coding ColdFusion for only 9 years. I have more than 40 clients building web sites on my system. I build sites for other clients on their systems too.  In all, over the last 9 years I've worked on self-hosted systems and shared hosting systems. In fact I think i've worked on sites on about 6 different hosting centres. Some mine, some were other hosting companies my clients have chosen.  My first learning experience all those years ago was with Shanje (SHUDDER!), and lately with HostMySite, and Netspeed and others in between. NOT ONE . .NONE have ever had any plan to allow users to get access to undelivered emails. As i said, i had this fantasy that last week alone I spent 6 hours trying to track down CFMAIL problems that my clients were having in their code. Obviously i was mistaken and was reading the paper all that time instead.   The panic emails from my clients asking for help figuring out why their forms weren't working were figments of my imagination. CFMAIL is a tag that gives a lot of heartburn to some users.    It was impertinent of me to suggest that perhaps we might make CFMAIL easier for users to code.   After all, ColdFusion had that reputation years ago that it was easy to use for neophytes,  but "REAL" SERVER PROGRAMS shed that notion really early on.   And if Coldfusion is to be a "REAL" SERVER app like .ASP or .PHP it has to be more difficult to use not easier. I dont know what i was thinking.  Easier to use.  Reduce the time taken to develop and debug.   Jeez.  That would only get in the way of the headlong rush to force ColdFusion into being a second-class imitation of something else rather than the best in the world at what it does best - something that the java and dotnet and php programmers would envy and whine about to their vendors.  NO! We wouldnt want that.  We have to continually compare CFMX to other solutions, instead of having THEM follow US. For many shared hosted users it isnt all there.  (not their - your spellcheck has led you astray).   You dont have experience of shared hosting Neil so I think you should pull your head in on the subject. There are quite a few aspects of CF sites that are different for shared hosted environments.   And access to server-level folders and the CF Admin  is one of them. It's not essential that CFMAIL be made easier to use and debug. But it would be of assistance to users in shared hosting environments.   We were talking about things we'd like to see in CF8.   I saw a need and said so but now i wish I hadn't.   I think CF would be a little easier and faster to develop with if debugging of that tag was improved. And found a simple thing that could be done to make it easier to debug.  Since then you've done nothing but cry it down.    I dont know why you see it as such a threat.  You wouldnt have to use it.  You could still do any debugging the old way. Apparently you think anything that makes CFMX easier to use and debug is a bad thing.  I can only imagine you think it makes it less like java or something if it's easier to use. I sure wont make the mistake again  of thinking it would be a good thing if CFMX were any easier to use even in a small way. Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com ColdFusion, PHP, ASP, ASP.NET hosting from AUD$15/month > That is not what we are saying! The fact here is that you say there is > no way to tell if an email fails - and we know there is - both at > server level and code. > > What more do you need to tell that an email fails? it is all their for you. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Regards cfmail, I would imagine the lack of error checking has something to do with the balance between speed and usability.  The more error checking it has to do, the more it slows down. If there was robust error checking in the context of a cfmail, people might be complaining that cfmail was too darn slow.  For years the knock on CF was "it's too heavy, too slow" (in some circles people still think that) so at some point I imagine the developers were leaning toward speed over usability, and so they sacrificed error checking in cfmail content.  Just a guess. -- Josh ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

It is more the lack of error reporting, as it does error log (in terms of SMTP)?   Who knows, I will log a wish for anyway to keep the faith...! "This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Oriel House, 26 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DL, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business, Registered in England, Number 678540.  It contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged.  It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com Regards cfmail, I would imagine the lack of error checking has something to do with the balance between speed and usability.  The more error checking it has to do, the more it slows down. If there was robust error checking in the context of a cfmail, people might be complaining that cfmail was too darn slow.  For years the knock on CF was "it's too heavy, too slow" (in some circles people still think that) so at some point I imagine the developers were leaning toward speed over usability, and so they sacrificed error checking in cfmail content.  Just a guess. -- Josh ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

LOL good one - I am not poo poo-ing Mike's request! Far from it I respect anyones drive to improve CD but... whether you buy it or not, once ColdFusion has written the email to disk / memory it is out of your calling threads hands. There is only a finite number or ways you could report that a mail has failed during a thread duration - as Mike noted username, password, and server and that is about it (and ColdFusion does this now). In the duration of the calling thread there is no way you could tell if an email is going to be successful or not (if it passes the security parts above) as what can ColdFusion do when an email is accepted to an SMTP server for an unknown user but that server is told to try sending it 10 times in say 1 week?! The only foolproof way is to use failto in tandom with cfpop.   Now, while I do see where improvements can be made and indeed should, like you noted but they are more underlying JavaMail feature based (more access to JavaMail stuff as I would love to get TLS working natively!) I also voted for the more ways to plugin your own cfmail engine. All I can ascertain here is a request that you can get access to the mail undeliverable folder in a shared environment which in itself is not related to cfmail. N "This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Oriel House, 26 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DL, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business, Registered in England, Number 678540.  It contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged.  It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com Ditto, Rick!  And workarounds are usually the easiest features to implement! You KNOW what you want, or expect, or whatnot. No need for votes, etc. CFMAIL has had "issues" for ages, it constantly killed my server, with CF 5 I think.  It's gotten better, but I can feel Mike's frustration, there is a certain air of the "fax modem" that's a modem but not really a fax, if you catch my drift. I think I saw a rating scale on how well various systems handled email, and CF was at the bottom. But that's just basically hear-say. I remember having to be up at 3am, just to restart CF and clean the spool folder. Heh. 'magine? "Having" to do anything... *sigh* (sorry, side thought about my lack of focus). But seriously, I've seen cfmail pop up as a complaint enough that I wouldn't try to sell it as not needing improvement.  I wouldn't mind being able to use some of the functionality that's already in javamail, for instance (secure imap! ;o).  I mean, *I* can, as I can gleam what I need to use the java, but no neophyte could do that very easy. It's a tough call, this feature request stuff.  Sorta like voting, is the real populace getting heard?  If a tree falls in the forest, and no one is around, does it matter?  Personally, I don't use the mail part of CF much, so I could care less, and would rather see some thing I *DO* use or want to use get the attention, but I won't try to downplay someone else's request to get mine in there.  Not that that's what happened, but you know, subconsciously, we want what we want or whatever. Plus, what is wanted is cake to do, we're not talking complicated math here.  Adobe could hire some goons for cfmail and still see a ton of improvement/nifty options. Personally, I would have filed Mike's request under "known issues"*, if anything.  But again, maybe just cuz I've run into trouble with it as well.  And don't buy the "once it's ""sent"", it's out of CF's hands" theory. Sheesh. Our UI's are finally coming back, but email is stuck in the last century? *known as in: Adobe could get a raft of "wishes" just via the livedocs. Heh.  Man, the moon must be at a certain distance from the earth or something, right?  I wish I could think of something funny to lighten the mood... oh, I know; What did the three legged dog say when he walked into the saloon?  WAIT FOR IT... WAIT FOR IT... I'm looking for the man who shot my paw. Har! Har! Har! Awesome, no? :]enny ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Interesting! I just ran out of things to solve after the classpath runtime issue and now maybe I could work on this cfmail problem. I normally can read (unofficially) all the unsent mail in the Undelivr folder and redo everything on a shared host. I have always done this and I have changed shared hosts a few times. I even have hsqldb running on a shared host! The speed level is way off the chart too.  I also do work for them installing stuff and fixing things, so they will never boot me. I told them about the hsqldb web server running inside CF and they did not care and I loaded it all at runtime with drivers, go figure. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

> -ps just be sure you download the trail and not the developer > edition, in case that makes a difference. It doesn't. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber vendor-authorized instruction at our training centers in Washington DC, Atlanta, Chicago, Baltimore, Northern Virginia, or on-site at your location. Visit http://training.figleaf.com/ for more information!

Jeez time flies... Doesn't seem that long ago it was 10! "This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Oriel House, 26 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DL, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business, Registered in England, Number 678540.  It contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged.  It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- Actually CF turned 11 this month.

> Actually CF turned 11 this month. HAPPY BIRTHDAY CF!!! (belatedly) :D

But what weight does it hold? "This e-mail is from Reed Exhibitions (Oriel House, 26 The Quadrant, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 1DL, United Kingdom), a division of Reed Business, Registered in England, Number 678540.  It contains information which is confidential and may also be privileged.  It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s).  If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error please return it to the sender or call our switchboard on +44 (0) 20 89107910.  The opinions expressed within this communication are not necessarily those expressed by Reed Exhibitions." Visit our website at http://www.reedexpo.com > If you have not yet seen this, check it out. Not that this is an > official Adobe survey, but if there's a huge developer call for some > specific features, then it may have an effect. It has in the past: > http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?u=354942405396 Hey Michael. That's a survey by me actually. :) I'll be posting the results on August 11th; it's an aggregation of things people have blogged about. It's high level, so when you see "BEtter XYZ..." - that means whatever you want it to mean. But it's more to capture people's perceptions, vs very low level specifics. Cheers! - Tariq (http://www.dopejam.com)